Ultraschall Med 2022; 43(05): 456-463
DOI: 10.1055/a-1854-2936
Guidelines & Recommendations

Professional Standards in Medical Ultrasound – EFSUMB Position Paper (Short Version) – General Aspects

Professionelle Standards im medizinischen Ultraschall – EFSUMB-Positionspapier – Allgemeine Aspekte
1   Central Interdisciplinary Sonography, Krankenhaus der Barmherzigen Brüder, Trier, Germany
2   Radiology Research laboratory, Riga Stradins University, Riga, Latvia
3   Diagnostic Radiology Institute, Paul Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia
Fabrizio Calliada
4   Department of Radiology, Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy
Vito Cantisani
5   Department of Radiology, “Sapienza” University of Rome, ROME, Italy
6   Department of Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
7   National Centre for Ultrasound in Gastroenterology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
Klaus-Vitold Jenderka
8   FB INW, Hochschule Merseburg, Germany
Adnan Kabaalioğlu
9   Radiology Department, Koç University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
Milan Kocian
10   Anästhesie und Intensiv, Asklepios Klinik Burglengenfeld, Germany
11   Visual Medicine s. r. o., Olomouc, Czech Republic
Christian Kollmann
12   Center for Medical Physics & Biomedical Engineering, Medical University Vienna, Austria
Julian Künzel
13   Otorhinolaryngology, University of Regensburg, Germany
Adrian Lim
14   Imaging, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
15   Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, “L. Sacco” University Hospital, “L. Sacco” University Hospital, Milan, Italy
Vladimir Mitkov
16   Diagnostic Ultrasound Division, Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education, Moscow, Russian Federation
Alina Popescu
17   Gastroenterology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timisoara, Romania
Adrian Saftoiu
18   Res Ctr Gastroenterol Hepatol, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, Romania
19   Radiology, Kingʼs College London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Christian Jenssen
20   Klinik für Innere Medizin, Krankenhaus Märkisch Oderland Strausberg/Wriezen, Germany
› Author Affiliations


This first position paper of the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB) on professional standards presents a common position across the different medical professions within EFSUMB regarding optimal standards for the performing and reporting of ultrasound examinations by any professional ultrasound operator. It describes general aspects of professionality that ensure procedure quality, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability in virtually all application fields of medical ultrasound. Recommendations are given related to safety and indication of ultrasound examinations, requirements for examination rooms, structured examination, systematic reporting of results, and management, communication and archiving of ultrasound data. The print version of this article is a short version. The long version is published online.


Dieses erste Positionspapier der European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB) zu professionellen Standards beschreibt eine gemeinsame Position der verschiedenen medizinischen Berufe innerhalb der EFSUMB zu optimalen Standards, wie Ultraschall-Untersuchungen von jedem professionellen Untersucher durchgeführt und befundet werden sollten. Beschrieben werden allgemeine Aspekte der Professionalität, die die Qualität, Effektivität, Effizienz und Nachhaltigkeit in praktisch allen Anwendungsbereichen des medizinischen Ultraschalls gewährleisten. Empfehlungen werden gegeben zur Sicherheit und Indikationsstellung von Ultraschall-Untersuchungen, zu Anforderungen an Untersuchungsräume, zur strukturierten Untersuchung und systematischen Befundung sowie zur Verarbeitung, Kommunikation und Archivierung von Ultraschalldaten. Die gedruckte Version dieses Artikels ist eine kurze Version. Die lange Version wird online veröffentlicht.

Publication History

Received: 28 July 2021

Accepted: 09 May 2022

Article published online:
18 July 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

  • References

  • 1 Education and Professional Standards Committee, European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. Minimum training recommendations for the practice of medical ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2006; 27 (01) 79-105
  • 2 Edwards HM, Sidhu PS. Whoʼs doing your scan? A European perspective on ultrasound services. Ultraschall in Med 2017; 38 (05) 479-482
  • 3 Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (Consolidated version): EUR-Lex – 32017R0745 – EN – EUR-Lex (europa.eu) (accessed April 17, 2021).
  • 4 Gesetz über Medizinprodukte (Medizinproduktegesetz – MPG, BGBl. I p. 1133) 7.8.2002, adopted 18.7.2017; Germany. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/mpg/MPG.pdf (accessed April 17, 2021)
  • 5 Bundesgesetz betreffend Medizinprodukte (Medizinproduktegesetz – MPG, Fassung v. 12.9.2018, BGBl. No. 657/1996), Austria. RIS – Medizinproduktegesetz – Bundesrecht konsolidiert, Fassung vom 22.05.2021 (bka.gv.at) (accessed April 17, 2021).
  • 6 European Commission, Single Market and Standards, Notified Bodies, Brussels. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/singlemarket/goods/building-blocks/notified-bodies_en
  • 7 Kollmann C, Jenderka KV, Moran C. et al. EFSUMB clinical safety statement for diagnostic ultrasound – (2019 revision). Ultraschall in Med 2020; 41 (04) 387-389
  • 8 EFSUMB – ECMUS Safety Statements. https://www.efsumb.org/safety-statements (accessed april 17, 2021)
  • 9 Schiavone C, Grassi R, Bertolotto M. et al. The sonographic medical act. J Ultrasound 2020; 23 (04) 445-447
  • 10 Livingston CJ, Freeman RJ, Mohammad A. et al. Choosing Wisely in preventive medicine: The American College of Preventive Medicine’s top 5 list of recommendations. Am J Prev Med 2016; 51 (01) 141-149
  • 11 Dietrich CF, Westerway S, Nolsoe C. et al. Commentary on the World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology project “incidental findings”. Ultrasound Med Biol 2020; 46 (07) 1815-1820
  • 12 Hayward C. Sizing Imaging and Procedure Rooms, January 2, 2021. https://blog.spacemed.com/sizing-imaging-and-procedure-rooms/ (accessed march 26, 2022)
  • 13 Facility Guidelines Institute with assistance from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2.2-3.4.5 Ultrasound, in: 2010 Guidelines for Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities. https://www.aapm.org/meetings/amos2/pdf/49-14367-84348-888.pdf (accessed march 26, 2022)
  • 14 EFSUMB. Best Practice recommendation for cleaning and disinfection of ultrasound transducers whilst maintaining transducer integrity. 2019 Available at (accessed April 17, 2021): https://www.efsumb.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2019-probe_cleaning_recommendation.pdf
  • 15 Nyhsen CM, Humphreys H, Koerner RJ. et al. Infection prevention and control in ultrasound – best practice recommendations from the European Society of Radiology Ultrasound Working Group. Insights Imaging 2017; 8 (06) 523-535
  • 16 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. Guidelines for Cleaning and Preparing External- and Internal-Use Ultrasound Transducers and Equipment Between Patients as well as Safe Handling and Use of Ultrasound Coupling Gel. https://www.aium.org/officialStatements/57 (accessed April 17, 2021)
  • 17 Müller T, Martiny H, Merz E. et al. DEGUM recommendations on infection prevention in ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2018; 39 (03) 284-303
  • 18 Basseal M, Westerway SC, Juraja M. et al. Guidelines for reprocessing ultrasound transducers. Australas J Ultrasound Med 2017; 20: 30-40
  • 19 American College of Emergency Physicians. Guideline for Ultrasound Transducer Cleaning and Disinfection. Ann Emerg Med 2018; 72: e45-e47
  • 20 Westerway SC, Basseal JM, Abramovicz JS. Medical ultrasound disinfection and hygiene practices: WFUMB global survey results. Ultrasound Med Biol 2019; 45: 344-352
  • 21 Dietrich CF, Bamber J, Berzigotti A. et al. EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Use of Liver Ultrasound Elastography, Update 2017 (Long Version). Ultraschall in Med 2017; 38 (04) e16-e47
  • 22 Săftoiu A, Gilja OH, Sidhu PS. et al. The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for the Clinical Practice of Elastography in Non-Hepatic Applications: Update 2018. Ultraschall in Med 2019; 40 (04) 425-453
  • 23 Sidhu PS, Cantisani V, Dietrich CF. et al. The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for the Clinical Practice of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in Non-Hepatic Applications: Update 2017 (Long Version). Ultraschall in Med 2018; 39 (02) e2-e44
  • 24 Dietrich CF, Nolsøe CP, Barr RG. et al. Guidelines and Good Clinical Practice Recommendations for Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Liver – Update 2020 – WFUMB in Cooperation with EFSUMB, AFSUMB, AIUM, and FLAUS. Ultraschall in Med 2020; 41 (05) 562-585
  • 25 Atkinson NSS, Bryant RV, Dong Y. et al. How to perform gastrointestinal ultrasound: Anatomy and normal findings. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23 (38) 6931-6941
  • 26 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. AIUM practice guideline for the performance of an ultrasound examination of the abdomen and/or retroperitoneum. J Ultrasound Med 2012; 31 (08) 1301-1312
  • 27 Walas MK, Skoczylas K, Gierbliński I. Standards of the Polish Ultrasound Society – update. The liver, gallbladder and bile ducts examinations. J Ultrason 2012; 12 (51) 428-445
  • 28 Ćwik G. Standards of the Polish Ultrasound Society – update. Pancreas examination. J Ultrason 2013; 13 (53) 167-177
  • 29 Tyloch JF, Woźniak MM, Wieczorek AP. Standards of the Polish Ultrasound Society – update. Ultrasound examination of the kidneys, ureters and urinary bladder. J Ultrason 2013; 13 (54) 293-307
  • 30 Laursen CB, Clive A, Hallifax R. et al. European Respiratory Society Statement on Thoracic Ultrasound. Eur Respir J 2020; 2001519
  • 31 Gargani L, Volpicelli G. How I do it: lung ultrasound. Cardiovasc Ultrasound 2014; 12: 25
  • 32 Möller I, Janta I, Backhaus M. et al. The 2017 EULAR standardised procedures for ultrasound imaging in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis 2017; 76 (12) 1974-1979
  • 33 Kwak JY, Han KH, Yoon JH. et al. Thyroid imaging reporting and data system for US features of nodules: a step in establishing better stratification of cancer risk. Radiology 2011; 260 (03) 892-899
  • 34 Trzebińska A, Dobruch-Sobczak K, Jakubowski W. et al. Standards of the Polish Ultrasound Society – update. Ultrasound examination of thyroid gland and ultrasound-guided thyroid biopsy. J Ultrason 2014; 14 (56) 49-60
  • 35 Mitchell C, Rahko PS, Blauwet LA. et al. Guidelines for Performing a Comprehensive Transthoracic Echocardiographic Examination in Adults: Recommendations from the American Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2019; 32 (01) 1-64
  • 36 Santos SND, Alcantara ML, Freire CMV. et al. Vascular Ultrasound Statement from the Department of Cardiovascular Imaging of the Brazilian Society of Cardiology – 2019. Arq Bras Cardiol 2019; 112 (06) 809-849
  • 37 Małek G, Nowicki A. Standards of the Polish Ultrasound Society – update. Sonography of the lower extremity veins. J Ultrason 2014; 14 (58) 287-296
  • 38 Małek G, Elwertowski M, Nowicki A. Standards of the Polish Ultrasound Society – update. Ultrasound examination of the aorta and arteries of the lower extremities. J Ultrason 2014; 14 (57) 192-202
  • 39 Elwertowski M, Małek G. Standards of the Polish Ultrasound Society – update. Examination of the extracranial carotid and vertebral arteries. J Ultrason 2014; 14 (57) 179-191
  • 40 Millington SJ, Colvin MO, Shiloh AL. et al. How I Do It: Ultrasound-Guided Internal Jugular and Femoral Central Venous Catheter Insertion. Chest 2020; 158 (06) 2425-2430
  • 41 Troianos CA, Hartman GS, Glas KE. et al. Guidelines for performing ultrasound guided vascular cannulation: recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2011; 24 (12) 1291-1318
  • 42 Armas RR. Qualities of a good radiology report. Am J Roentgenol 1998; 170 (04) 1110
  • 43 Brady AP. Radiology reporting – from Hemingway to HAL?. Insights Imaging 2018; 9 (02) 237-246
  • 44 Weiss DL, Langlotz CP. Structured Reporting: Patient Care Enhancement or Productivity Nightmare?. Radiology 2008; 249 (03) 739-747
  • 45 European Society of Radiology. ESR paper on structured reporting in radiology. Insights Imaging 2018; 9 (01) 1-7
  • 46 Kuhn K, Zemmler T, Reichert M. et al. Structured data collection and knowledge-based user guidance for abdominal ultrasound reporting. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1993: 311-315
  • 47 OʼConnor SD, Kulkarni NM, Griffin MO Jr. et al. Structured reporting in ultrasound. Ultrasound Q 2020; 36 (01) 1-5
  • 48 An JY, Unsdorfer KML, Weinreb JC. BI-RADS, C-RADS, CAD-RADS, LI-RADS, Lung-RADS, NI-RADS, O-RADS, PI-RADS, TI-RADS: Reporting and Data Systems. Radiographics 2019; 39 (05) 1435-1436
  • 49 Ernst BP, Hodeib M, Strieth S. et al. Structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound examinations. BMC Med Imaging 2015; 19: 25
  • 50 Russ G, Bonnema SJ, Erdogan MF. et al. European Thyroid Association Guidelines for Ultrasound Malignancy Risk Stratification of Thyroid Nodules in Adults: The EU-TIRADS. Eur Thyroid J 2017; 6 (05) 225-237
  • 51 Chernyak V, Fowler KJ, Kamaya A. et al. Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Version 2018: Imaging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in At-Risk Patients. Radiology 2018; 289 (03) 816-830
  • 52 Kono Y, Lyshchik A, Cosgrove D. et al. Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS®): the official version by the American College of Radiology (ACR). Ultraschall in Med 2017; 38 (01) 85-86
  • 53 Geyer T, Rübenthaler J, Marschner C. et al. Structured Reporting Using CEUS LI-RADS for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC)-Impact and Advantages on Report Integrity, Quality and Interdisciplinary Communication. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13 (03) 534
  • 54 Schwartz LH, Panicek DM, Berk AR. et al. Improving communication of diagnostic radiology findings through structured reporting. Radiology 2011; 260 (01) 174-181
  • 55 Ernst BP, Katzer F, Kunzel J. et al. Impact of structured reporting on developing head and neck ultrasound skills. BMC Med Educ 2019; 19: 102
  • 56 Ernst BP, Strieth S, Katzer F. et al. The use of structured reporting of head and neck ultrasound ensures time-efficiency and report quality during residency. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2020; 277: 269-276
  • 57 Bidgood WD Jr, Horii SC, Prior FW. et al. Understanding and using DICOM, the data interchange standard for biomedical imaging. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1997; 4 (03) 199-212
  • 58 Graham RN, Perriss RW, Scarsbrook AF. DICOM demystified: a review of digital file formats and their use in radiological practice. Clin Radiol 2005; 60 (11) 1133-1140
  • 59 Foord K. Year 2000: status of picture archiving and digital imaging in European hospitals. Eur Radiol 2001; 11 (03) 513-524
  • 60 Cantisani V, Grani G, Tovoli F. et al. Artificial Intelligence: What is it and how can it expand the ultrasound potential in the future?. Ultraschall in Med 2020; 41 (04) 356-360